CC MINUTES 10041977 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

He said only Apache might have known about them and frequent changes in the personnel of that organization might have prevented them from having such knowledge when they sold the property to the Beutzes . Mr. Gross insisted he, as a representative for Mr. and Mrs . Beutz, "did everything reasonable to assure the title to the land was clear before they purchased it" . He questioned the City' s right to reassess the property by citing the case of Rose Realty versus City of Roseville which he said had established the fact that "A good faith purchaser can't be held responsible for the assessments they are not aware of" . He agreed with Mr. Odlaug that "because some City employees had failed to follow through on the collection of the assessments, the City was trying to shift the problem to the innocent Beutzes who did all they reasonably could do--ato search the title to the property before they bought and who will now have to incur substantial legal expenses, even if vindicated" . Mr. Gross further contended an Attorney General 's opinion of 1949 had established that "unless a village attorney de- termines an assessment is invalid, the City does not have the power to assess" . He concluded by saying "this steamroller attempt to collect now is not 'Hoyle ' from the standpoint of the law" . • When the question was raised regarding which specific Apache corporation held title to the Beutz property when they bought it, Mr. Gross said an agreement had been reached with the City Attorney to accept the Apache Realty Company as owner of record for purposes of transferring the property although there was no conclusive evidence that such was the case. Councilman Stauffer said she nevertheless felt that whichever "Apache Corporation" owned the property when the improvements were made also would have had knowledge of the assessments . Mayor Miedtke pointed out that the City had the option of either not spreading the assessments to the properties which enjoyed the improve- ments or approving the resolution which would reassess and reapportion the costs of the those improvements . He felt the latter course should be followed in justice to the other property owners who had paid their fair share of the improvements costs and were under the impression that others whose property was enhanced by the same improvements had also paid their share of the costs . Motion by Councilman Stauffer and seconded by Councilman Haik to adopt Resolution 77-049 as well as the assessment rolls it establishes and set a rate of 8% interest to be reapplied to the unpaid balance as well as a repayment period of 10 years. (2)